[RFI] Washer RFI/EMI

R March n7ua at embarqmail.com
Mon Sep 7 09:20:43 PDT 2009

Do a "total extraneous energy calculation" world wide, for all 
appliances. Include the added power needed by other services to overcome 
the raised noise floor from Part 15 exempt devices. Even at low levels 
it will add up to lots of power. Make the case that the wasted energy 
contributes to global warming, which of course it does. (We must all be 
vigilant!) Also make the case that the USA is the culprit  in this 
scandal, clearly abusing the environment, especially compared to our 
more enlightened European neighbors. Then request government funding to 
"research" this important contributor to global warming (oops, I mean 
"climate change") problem and demand that the FCC ban incidental 
radiators, or at the very least, register all such devices.
Seriously though, unfortunately, it may be the only way to get the FCC 
to act on this. Bob  N7UA

Paul Christensen wrote:
>> In other words, you do NOT want the chassis or "ground" to be part of the
>> current path, either at the fundamental frequency or at the high harmonics
>> (RF) that are causing us grief.
> My thought is to isolate any existing cabinet shielding from the RFI 
> abatement.  This would include using large #31 toroids on the VFD cabling 
> close to the motor connect point, and also close to the serving VFD circuit 
> point that connects the motor by wires.  But as you know Jim, trying to get 
> ample turns to provide enough choking reactance oftentimes means extending 
> the wires. -- and that can turn into a real project.  When I attack this, 
> I'll try to document the inside changes if I'm successful.  The toroids are 
> here -- it's just a matter of doing this when the XYL is away <g>.
> I've also given consideration to the filing of a Petition for Rulemaking 
> with the FCC to amend Part 15 to include "appliances" that are currently 
> exempt from meeting RFI standards.  But that kind of filing needs the 
> backing of interested organizations.  The EU nations have been more 
> proactive on this front and my understanding is that their household 
> appliances must meet the same strict RFI/EMI standards as is required of 
> other electronic equipment.
> This is an area ripe for organizations like the ARRL, NAB, SBE, AES, and the 
> like to join forces.  It's interesting to note that in the most recent 
> edition of RadioWorld, a well-read broadcast engineering publication, the 
> front page story addressed the gradual increase in average noise floor over 
> time from unintentional radiators.  The point the author was making, is that 
> the rise in noise floor due to these devices is already having a devastating 
> impact on analog AM and HD radio services in North America.  What the author 
> did not address is the fact that the rise in noise floor is due in large 
> part to exempt appliances that internally use computers, inverters, and 
> switch-mode power supplies in everything from the clothes washer to the 
> toaster.   These internal devises by themselves must meet technical 
> standards, but as soon as that device is thrown into an "appliance," it is 
> then exempt from meeting unintentional radiator standards.  Why?
> We really need to get Part 15 current with the times.  As more consumers 
> replace their household appliances with models that incorporate RFI/EMI 
> emitting technology, the problem will only become worse.
>  Paul, W9AC
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi

More information about the RFI mailing list